QuoteReplyTopic: Members' Discussion of FINAL D 5 in 3-D Posted: August 31 2011 at 2:50pm

Originally posted by buddy

I do not want to get too involved in this discussion as it seems to me that neither side will budge from their opinions. Just to point out I have not liked the Final Destination movies thus far but have not seen FD5 yet. I just find it interesting how the ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are either manipulated, respected or ignored by people here to suit their own agenda. If one likes a movie and it gets a good score then the critics are professionals who know what they are doing. If one does not like a movie and it gets a good score then the critics are biased and obviously wrong. Things are always twisted to suit people's own opinions. It is rather annoying in my opinion.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Like it's funny how, in this example, horror movie sites are biased into liking FD5 yet they aren't when they agree with the majority on other films? Another way of thinking it is if horror movies sites are biased into liking this film, then aren't reviewers who gave this film a negative review are biased into not liking it since they hate the franchise and want it to go away? Or how about this: Maybe there isn't any bias going on and we should take the critics' word for it.

This has nothing to do with the movie, because we're going to forget that it even exists by this time next year. Three things:

1. The whole thing with RT is a joke anyway. MWG treats it like some kind of seal of approval. It's like "so long as it's 60% or higher, it's okay to say it's a good movie and that I enjoyed it, because professional critics agree with me". It's like gay couples in a parade due to New York now accepting gay marriage, it's okay to come out of the closet because it's now socially acceptable. Same thing here with MWG and his beloved RT ratings. He did the same thing with "Orphan" last year when he was counting down it just barely reaching 59%. It's just stupid bulls*** he does. The kid sees things or qualities in movies that just aren't there or he wants to see there, and it's clear professional critics who know what a good is see the movie for what it is, a piece of s***. And we did the RT discussion with 27Years and her quest to protect "Twilight" with the "we shouldn't razz movies with higher than 60%". Point being, RT should not be the measuring stick; we're giving them way too much power. The Razzies worked fine for 15 years without the site, and it can still function just fine without it. RT = overrated. And no, I'm not saying that because it's at 60%, I'm just saying it because it's true. Razzies voters don't need RT to know what a bad movie is, all they have to do is watch it.

2. GPA numbers don't impress me. Your GPA is NOT your IQ. A 3.5 GPA doesn't mean you will be the next Stephen Hawkings. To take a quote from "Good Will Hunting", even the Unabomber did very well for himself in school, and look what happened to him. Hell, when I was in high school, I was on the Honor Roll five times in a row, won the Presidental Award for Excellence In Education, and was invited to join the National Honor Society. So it makes me laugh inside when MWG says "Oh, I'm smart because of my GPA". Kid, having a 3.5 GPA is nothing impossible. All you have to do is hand in your work on time and in a proper manner and study hard for tests, that's it. In fact, the only reasons why not everyone is a straight A student are 1. A failing school system, 2. the student has a learning disability, 3. the student is undisciplined and unmotivated.

3. And this goes back to #2, just because you're book smart, doesn't mean you're street smart, which you have proven time and time again that you're not. MWG gets owned in just about every argument you make here against members who are clearly smarter than him, and all he his to offer are lame and prejudgemental insults that are no where even close to being true. And back to 27Years, at least he/she take a hint that he/she wasn't being accepted and walked away for good. I wish MWG would take that hint, too, that his opinion is not accepted or welcomed and that he's a f***ing joke and he should just go away for good. But the kid is a social retard and he will always come back for more punishment. But hey, every village has its idiot, and every forum has it's running joke, and that's all MWG is good for.

End of rant. Good bye.

The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.

Even though most times HeadRAZZ posts the Metacritic link as well,a lot of times he posts the R.T. link only.You're not the first nor the last person to complain that their system is flawed.The thing is nobody thinks it's perfect,it's just that there's no other site like those 2.What do you suggest?

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

MWG treats it like some kind of seal of approval.

I don't mind that he goes by what R.T. says,a lot of people do.But it is true that sometimes he make a big deal if a movie gets a 60%.That's hanging on to crumbles.

I just saw it.Before I start,I warn you I won't write spoilers in white.I won't write spoilers at all.

I'm berry dissapointed,with everybody saying it was the best of the franchise.Similar to SchumacherH8ter's system,I'll judge this death by death:

-As everyone knows,these movies open with a big disaster where only the main characters survive.That was one of the best scenes I've seen all year.I grabbed the seat as hard as I could,the FX were better than the previous installments,etc.

-As everyone knows,the main characters start dying one by one.The first death was great.The producers promised this to be dark like the 1st movie(the 4th one tried to be a comedy),and it was true.While the moment of the death was shown with a twisted humour everything leading up to it was thrilling.Needless to say they took out the Slasher Flick feeling that was in the 1st one.

-The next 3 deaths focus less on scarying and more on having things jump to the screen,the fatal mistake in the 4th movie.

-The 5th death was just stupid,maily because of the characters' reactions to it.It honestly felt like a B/C/Z movie.

-As everyone knows,these movies climax on 2-3 characters surviving...only to then be killed in the last couple of seconds before it fades to black.Here they added a twist to it.I was having a discussion to the other day with my classmates.One recomended us not to see DREAM HOUSE.She said "Not because it has a twist,but because it's a twist that makes it all look like a waste of time".The twist here wasn't like that,but it still didn't contributed except for a nice surprise.

To sum up,when it started I was glad to see the makers were toying with the idea of the audience thinking we know everything that will happen,which is also reflected in the ending*.But during the middle I felt they were actually following the format step by step,and it made me glad that the movie is only 90 minutes long.I mean,the "We weren't meant to survive" speech is said at least 3 times!After it was over,I realized that I didn't had a bad time,but it was just more of the same.

I give it 4/10.

F.Y.C.:

-Actor;Actress;Supp. Actor;Supp. Actress:No,nobody highlighted.Although I'd like to point out that in each installment the characters become less and less interesting and more and more one-dimensional,making it hard for the actors to do a god job even if they try.Also,Miles Fisher,who is "known" for his impersonation of Tom Cruise,is unaware that he keeps doing that here.

-Ensemble:Maybe.

-Prequel/Sequel;Excuse For Horror Movie:Yes.

-Director;Screenplay;Couple;Picture:No.

*This was the reason why the LOST episode THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS is one of the best in TV history.Agree?

-As everyone knows,the main characters start dying one by one.The first death was great.The producers promised this to be dark like the 1st movie(the 4th one tried to be a comedy),and it was true.While the moment of the death was shown with a twisted humour everything leading up to it was thrilling.Needless to say they took out the Slasher Flick feeling that was in the 1st one.

Yes, the first death is amazing. The effective use of cross cutting and build up made the suspense so unbearable and the fact that the outcome of the death is so much worse than what you were expecting (there were lots of red herrings in this one) in the first place makes it a highlight in the film. Also, I liked the little moment when the rubber band breaks. That added a "$hit just got real" aspect to the whole scene.

-The next 3 deaths focus less on scarying and more on having things jump to the screen,the fatal mistake in the 4th movie.

I still thought the deaths had a sense of uneasiness to them. Anything dealing with things going into an eye makes me really uncomfortable, along with needles in the body. I liked how they made it squeamish. However, the results of the deaths are less worse than the build up to them. Also, they were really effective to see in 3D.

Originally posted by Vits

But
during the middle I felt they were actually following the format step
by step,and it made me glad that the movie is only 90 minutes long.I
mean,the "We weren't meant to survive" speech is said at least 3
times!After it was over,I realized that I didn't had a bad time,but it
was just more of the same.

But "more of the same" isn't really a complaint is it? Those who go
watch these films (especially for the fifth time) will expect more of
the same. However, the addition of "killing someone saves yourself"
aspect of it made it more different from the rest of the sequels. The
way it played out in the climax was very satisfying and different from your usual Final Destination climax.

Usually I expect more of the same,but most reviews said that the movie was fresh and stuff.

As for the "killing someone saves yourself"...that's a pretty good debate,but I didn't feel they use it well.I mean,they don't really debate about it,they just expected us to assume everything.Also,how was it satisfying that the guy had to kill his brother and then it's like he doesn't care?And it's not that different.In most of these movies there are points where the characters start fighting each other for whatever reason.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou can vote in polls in this forum